5 ms·
That's a reasonable argument. But it requires a very high level of understanding of (bat) corona-viruses in general with a majority of corona-viruses that exist
by Pyramus 6y ago
That's a reasonable argument. But it requires a very high level of understanding of (bat) corona-viruses in general with a majority of corona-viruses that exist having been sequenced etc.
From my (limited) understanding we only know about a fraction of corona-viruses out there, and hence there is great uncertainty in the phylogenetic modelling.
I haven't seen a credible write-up, if you can point me in the right direction, that would be appreciated.
- trevelyan 6y agoRaTG13 geonome was published January 23, 2020 by Wuhan Institute of Virology. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.22.914952v1.full https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.22.914952v1.... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN996532 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN996532
- Uberphallus 6y agoActually part of the genome of RaTG13 was published as RaBtCoV/4991 back in 2016. Some people suspected it [0] and eventually Dr. Shi confirmed it [1] after. [0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341547726_Understanding_the_Origin_of_%27BatCoVRaTG13%27_a_Virus_Closest_to_SARS-CoV-2 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341547726_Understan... [1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6503/487.full https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6503/487.full
- trevelyan 6y agoThank you for the reference. [1] particularly interesting.